Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Speaking of Communion (Lord's Supper, Eucharist); the idea that liturgical faiths have that the bread and wine are literally Jesus's flesh and blood and that partakers are eating his literal flesh and literal blood. I can see it being a memorial that has value as a sacrament simply because Jesus says so, but to insist that it's literal flesh and blood seems like a kind of cannibalism. I don't know how else to put this, but I admit to finding it a bit disturbing.
First and foremost, because He says so.But why theologically speaking is it important that it's literal blood and flesh? What is the significance of it salvation-wise?
BRILLIANT!First and foremost, because He says so.
But another way of looking at it is going back to Israel's observance of Passover. Did they slaughter the Passover lamb and forget about it? Or did they eat the lamb?
If Our Lord is the perfect Passover lamb (and He is), what do you suppose we are to do with His flesh and blood?
They cooked the lamb and ate it.But another way of looking at it is going back to Israel's observance of Passover. Did they slaughter the Passover lamb and forget about it? Or did they eat the lamb?
You're going to need to figure out what Jesus directly said about those comments about His flesh and His blood when He saw that the disciples were having a hard time swallowing them. That is found in John 6:63. "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life."Speaking of Communion (Lord's Supper, Eucharist); the idea that liturgical faiths have that the bread and wine are literally Jesus's flesh and blood and that partakers are eating his literal flesh and literal blood. I can see it being a memorial that has value as a sacrament simply because Jesus says so, but to insist that it's literal flesh and blood seems like a kind of cannibalism. I don't know how else to put this, but I admit to finding it a bit disturbing.
And is it true,
This most tremendous tale of all,
Seen in a stained-glass window's hue,
A Baby in an ox's stall ?
The Maker of the stars and sea
Become a Child on earth for me ?
And is it true ? For if it is,
No loving fingers tying strings
Around those tissued fripperies,
The sweet and silly Christmas things,
Bath salts and inexpensive scent
And hideous tie so kindly meant,
No love that in a family dwells,
No carolling in frosty air,
Nor all the steeple-shaking bells
Can with this single Truth compare -
That God was man in Palestine
And lives today in Bread and Wine
Why would he say that? Why would he tell his disciples to consume him like food? I know that Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans and Anglicans believe the Eucharist is a means of grace. I just find it really a strange thing that Jesus would say these things.
Speaking of Communion (Lord's Supper, Eucharist); the idea that liturgical faiths have that the bread and wine are literally Jesus's flesh and blood and that partakers are eating his literal flesh and literal blood. I can see it being a memorial that has value as a sacrament simply because Jesus says so, but to insist that it's literal flesh and blood seems like a kind of cannibalism. I don't know how else to put this, but I admit to finding it a bit disturbing.
I don't take communion ever (and I think I am probably the only one who doesn't at my church) but I feel that when Jesus died on the cross, when the earth shook, rocks split, tombs opened, and when the curtain was rent in two...Jesus, and Jesus only...because my communion with God, and anything else is merely a substitute.
I don't take communion ever
But why theologically speaking is it important that its literal blood and flesh? What is the significance of it salvation-wise?
How do you reconcile that with the command of our Lord to take communion? I can understand on a hypothetical level the adherence of some to the ideas of Zwingli or Melancthon regarding Communion, but to reject it entirely; even the Baptists would say that is an error.
I don't think that communion is necessary for salvation, but Jesus says: "This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me." /Luk 22:19
I see no reason for not taking it, but plenty of reasons for taking it. To me it's a great thing, to do what the apostles did together with Jesus. A blessing really. Almost like moving back in time 2000 years
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?